- From: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
- Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 05:22:24 +0900
- To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Cc: Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>, "public-restrictedmedia@w3.org" <public-restrictedmedia@w3.org>
Le 3 juin 2013 à 04:09, Mark Watson a écrit : > So, that would exclude anything where the patent landscape was such > that any performant implementation would require non-RF licenses, for > example wireless Internet technology ? It seems an abuse of language. * any implementation * performant implementation (a subset of any implementation) * "would require non-RF licenses" There is nothing which is from a technology point of view requiring a patent. Patents systems are here to promote a certain idea of our societies infrastructures. Some people cherish it, some not. The W3C has adopted the RF patent policy for the same reasons to allow/promote a certain idea of our society. The right to implement any Web related systems without encumbrance for the developers (with or without deep pockets). If the "patent landscape" is such that it becomes not possible to implement something with that idea as a corner stone, then we have to go around [1]. Having a system where two legs are necessary for working and one of them is under RF doesn't make sense. [1]: https://www.google.fr/search?q=pag%20site%3Awww.w3.org -- Karl Dubost http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Sunday, 2 June 2013 20:22:32 UTC